20FL010940C

EX13 - 2026-04-03 - Jennifer's sworn allegations of child physical abuse

5 min read

Exhibit #13 — Jennifer’s sworn allegations of child physical abuse

Description

On April 3, 2026, Jennifer Lynn Nibley signed under penalty of perjury the Mother’s Opposition to Father’s Ex Parte Request, prepared by Jose A. Orozco, Esq. (SBN 283275) of Orozco Law Firm, APC and filed in advance of the April 6, 2026 ex parte hearing in Dept. 704. The opposition contains the following sworn statements alleging physical abuse of the parties’ minor children:

  • ¶2: “She also disclosed to various third parties that Father and school are triggers for her and that Father yells and hits them, including her brother, Jack.” (emphasis added — only paragraph that names Jack specifically as a hitting victim)

  • ¶5: “During that assessment, Ella disclosed her main triggers are Father and school. Ella explained Father yells and hits them and Father is constantly pressuring her to raise her grades, especially in math.”

  • ¶6: “During this evaluation and safety screening with MCRT, Ella disclosed to MCRT the reason for her suicidal thoughts were : 1) Father because he gets angry, yells, hits ‘them’ and puts pressure on her about school; and 2) School. These were the 2 triggers.”

  • ¶8: “Aurora Social Worker informed me that Ella disclosed the same abuse allegations to them when she was evaluated at Aurora on March 24, 2026, and that they also filed a report with CPS.”

  • ¶18: “I respectfully request the Court deny all of Father’s requests because they are not an emergency. The emergency in this case relates to Ella’s suicidal thoughts and Father abusing our children.”

¶¶ 2, 5, 6, and 8 attribute the abuse allegations to Ella as relayed to third parties (school personnel including Jasmine De La Torre LCSW, MCRT, Aurora Social Worker). ¶18 is Jennifer’s own unattributed sworn assertion that Charley is “abusing our children.”

The opposition was the document filed in response to Charley’s April 4, 2026 Ex Parte Request seeking enforcement of the existing custody order. The document requested that the court grant Jennifer temporary sole physical custody pending completion of the CFWB investigation.

Sources and Documentation

The signed PDF copy of the opposition (Lawyaw Package ID: f0d6e30e-d604-4984-932b-a96a501a1afa) is the primary source. No declarations or statements from any of the third parties cited (Ms. De La Torre, MCRT, Aurora Social Worker) have been produced or filed corroborating Jennifer’s characterization of what Ella allegedly disclosed. Charley filed a sworn Reply Declaration on April 5, 2026 directly denying the abuse allegations under penalty of perjury (see Ex-Parte_2026_04_06_Charley_Reply_Declaration_to_Opposition.pdf ¶18).

Strategic Relevance

This exhibit is the anchor of the FC §3027.1 case. It establishes the sworn-allegation prong: Jennifer made child-abuse allegations during a custody proceeding, signed under penalty of perjury, attributing physical abuse of both children — and naming Jack specifically as a hitting victim — to Charley. Section 3027.1 authorizes mandatory monetary sanctions, including reasonable attorney fees, when such allegations are made with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth.

The §3027.1 case develops as follows:

  1. Sworn allegation: this exhibit (EX13). Establishes the predicate.
  2. Independent investigation non-corroboration as to Jack: EX18 - 2026-04-16 - CFWB confirms Jack’s interview did not corroborate hitting allegation. Jack himself, when interviewed by CFWB, did not corroborate the hitting allegation. Alexis Garcia Cortes proactively communicated this on April 16, 2026.
  3. CFWB closure (pending). When CFWB closes the investigation, the closing letter and underlying records will either substantiate or unsubstantiate the report. This is the third evidentiary prong.
  4. Sanctions motion. Premature to deploy until CFWB closes. Held in reserve.

Independent strategic uses prior to §3027.1 deployment:

  • Credibility anchor. Once the trier of fact has reason to question one specific factual allegation in this declaration, the remainder of the declaration — including the self-help schedule admission at ¶17, the characterization of Charley’s March 25 school visit at ¶10, and the discharge-day events at ¶¶ 12–14 — receive heightened scrutiny.

  • Attribution chain weakness. Every allegation in ¶¶ 2, 5, 6, and 8 is what Jennifer says a third party told her about what Ella said. None of the third parties have filed declarations. The MCRT safety plan and Aurora records have not been produced in admissible form. This is layered hearsay with no foundation.

  • Direct vs. attributed contrast. ¶18 is Jennifer’s own unattributed assertion (“Father abusing our children”). The trier of fact can compare this to (a) the absence of any direct percipient witness to alleged abuse, (b) Jack’s own non-corroboration, and (c) Charley’s sworn denial.

  • Minor’s counsel disclosure. Sara Davison, Esq. should receive a clean documentary set: this exhibit (the sworn allegation), EX18 (Jack’s CFWB interview), and any CFWB records when produced. The disclosure should be made through the formal channel once minor’s counsel contact is established.

  • 6/1 RFO rebuttal. If Jennifer’s 6/1 filings continue to assert physical abuse of either child as a basis for sole physical custody, this exhibit and EX18 are the rebuttal foundation.

  • Preserve clean copy of signed PDF in Attachments
  • When CFWB closes, obtain closing letter and any case-finding language
  • Pursue Family Code §3025 records request to CFWB (submitted April 4, 2026)
  • Through minor’s counsel investigation or subpoena, obtain Ms. De La Torre’s, MCRT’s, and Aurora’s contemporaneous records to test the attribution
  • At appropriate time, file FC §3027.1 motion with supporting declaration

Cross-references

Graph View

Backlinks